Value for Money

Shaun Bailey: How are you ensuring that Londoners receive value for money from the Metropolitan Police?

Sadiq Khan: My top priority continues to be keeping Londoners safe, and I have a duty to secure the efficiency and effectiveness of the MPS. The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) and the MPS pursue value for money in everything they do, but you do not have to just take my word for it; there are independent external assessments of how well the MPS now uses its resources and achieves value for money. HMICFRS in their police efficiency and effectiveness reports have said the MPS is good at making use of the resources available to it. Its latest published report states that, and I quote, “The MPS is good at meeting current demand and using resources. It works closely with other organisations to understand demand”. It also says that the MPS “understands what the public wants and uses this feedback to change the services it provides. It sets and manages its budgets well.”.
The external auditors’ annual report notes that, and I quote,
“MOPAC and the MPS have put in place effective arrangements to improve economy, efficiency and effectiveness. This includes making effective use of data to inform business decisions and using a performance framework and other tools to drive organisational performance to meet strategic objectives.”
The auditors recognise that the MPS has already undertaken considerable work to review all arrangements around transformation and change management. As a result of the Government’s cuts in policing the MPS has already delivered significant savings, in excess of £1billion since 2012/2013, through a variety of programmes.
The MPS transformation programme is one of the largest seen in the UK public sector. It has combined significant efficiencies in the MPS estate with investments to optimise operational activity and increase productivity through streamlining central headquarter functions. Significant savings have also been achieved by improving commercial awareness. For example, £300,000 of savings has been achieved by cancelling obsolete information technology (IT) systems, with a further £6.6million in the pipeline.
However, providing value for money cannot make up for the significant underfunding the MPS has had to endure. The Government’s police uplift programme did not allocate the 6,000 additional officers that the previous Commissioner judged to be necessary. I continue to lobby for a greater allocation of resources to London policing, and call on the Government to address the shortfall in the National and International Capital Cities (NICC) grant which, by the Home Office’s own admission, currently underfunds the MPS by £159million per year.

Shaun Bailey: Thank you for your answer, Mr Mayor. Good morning.

Sadiq Khan: Good morning.

Shaun Bailey: Can you tell me what level of resource is being spent on improving sanction detection rates? The trend is downward across many indicators, and we want to focus on where value can be gained.

Sadiq Khan: There is no carve‑out in relation to the MPS budget for sanction detection rates because it is not just a policing issue. It also means greater ‘joined‑up‑ness’ with the
Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and it is also to do with the backlog in relation to courts. I think there are 16,000 trials currently waiting in the Crown Court. It is a cross‑criminal justice system (CJS) function in relation to improving sanction detection rates rather than a carve‑out in relation to the MPS’ own budget.

Shaun Bailey: Is MOPAC doing any particular piece of work on helping to improve sanction detection rates in general? That figure might be easier to identify.

Sadiq Khan: The best example of where MOPAC is doing work with sanction detection rates is in relation to violence against women and girls. Assembly Member Pidgeon referred to the really poor conviction rates on rape. That is a good example where the combination of the Independent Sexual Violence Advisers () we are funding and the Independent Domestic Violence Advisors (IDVAs) help with attrition in relation to allegations of sexual offences. Having an adviser with you when you make a complaint is a good way of keeping that person involved in the prosecution, which helps with the sanction detection rates. That is the best example in relation to specific work MOPAC is doing in relation to sanction detection rates.
There are other examples. In the past, you were not guaranteed a visit from a police officer; now, even if you report a burglary online, if you want a visit from a police officer, they will come for a burglary. That also assists in relation to keeping a person involved in a potential prosecution, because it may just be that you are reporting it for a reference number in relation to an insurance claim. Those are not specifically for sanction detection rates, but they will help in relation to sanction detection rates.

Shaun Bailey: Your focus has been rightly on violent crime, that is correct, of your time of being Mayor, but could we ask for MOPAC to do specific work around sanction detection rates around things like robbery, knife crime, and so on? You pointed out what has been done around rape and there is some success there. If we were to do another specific piece of work to help sanction detection rates in those areas, do you believe it would help?

Sadiq Khan: I have no problem at all in the Police and Crime Committee, which may be the correct forum for these conversations to take place, to speak to the acting Commissioner‑‑ I know he is keen on particularly robbery as well. You will appreciate during the pandemic we saw some improvements there because there were fewer reports of robbery, because there were fewer people in the West End, for argument’s sake. Whether we can build on that progress going forward as well, I am more than happy to ask the acting Commissioner with the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime to come along to the Police and Crime Committee to discuss other things we can be doing to improve sanction detection rates. Just to reassure you, it is also a national initiative as well. I know the Home Secretary is quite concerned in relation to the 43 forces nationally. The sanction detections have not been as high as they should be. I am more than happy for them to come back to the Police and Crime Committee to explore with the Committee what more work can be done there.

Shaun Bailey: OK, thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Trans and Gender-Diverse Access to Healthcare

Andrew Boff: Do you think you should be taking the lead on improving trans and gender-diverse Londoners' access to healthcare?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am a passionate and vocal supporter of trans and gender‑diverse Londoners. I want to ensure that we do all that we can for these communities to enable them to live their lives authentically and with the respect we all deserve. Trans and gender‑diverse people should have full access to all the services and opportunities other Londoners have, including general health services. I meet regularly with the NHS leadership in London, and I will continue to champion the healthcare needs of trans and gender‑diverse people in these discussions.
I want to thank the Health Committee for their inquiry earlier this year into access to general healthcare for the trans and gender‑diverse community. The report recommendations raised several important issues about NHS data collection, highlighting actions the NHS could be taking to improve awareness of the needs of this group across the whole of the NHS, including through training for GPs and other staff.
Most of the recommendations contained within the report are aimed at the NHS and I know that the
Health Committee has followed these up directly. In my response to the Health Committee of 31March[2022] I agreed to write to NHSDigital regarding data collection. I have done this, and I await their reply, which I will share with the HealthCommittee when I receive it.
My Health Inequality Strategy contains many actions and approaches that will benefit trans and gender‑diverse Londoners, for example, mental health policies and programmes‑‑
Andrew Boff AM: Sorry, to interrupt you, MrMayor, but I have about five seconds left. All the recommendations that were recommended to other bodies you accepted. All the recommendations that were about what you should be doing you said you are going to wait around for somebody else to do. We want you to take the lead on this issue, not just expect other people to pick up the responsibility.
Dr Onkar Sahota AM (Chair): You are out of time now.

Living in London

Susan Hall: What are you doing to make London an attractive place to live?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): London is the greatest city in the world. I have lived in London my whole life. As much as it is a great city to visit, I know it is an even better city to live in. Like any major city, we have our challenges. My mission, as Mayor, has been to improve London for everyone who calls our city home. We have achieved a lot in the past six years. Londoners need decent homes they can afford and after decades of under‑delivery before I became Mayor, we are turning a corner in London. Almost 13,000 new CityHall‑funded council homes have been started since 2018 and we exceeded our affordable homes target yet again last year. Londoners need clear air and, thanks to bold policies, we have halved toxic air in central London, and we are going further to replicate this across more of our city. We have planted over 420,000 trees since I was first elected, creating new green lungs that not only clean our air but make London a better place to live.
Londoners need the skills to access good, well‑paid work and we helped 200,000 people access free skills training last year alone. I have put £44 million into my Academies Programme to help Londoners into good jobs. Londoners need to be able to get around safely and quickly. We launched the Night Tube and extended the Northern line. Next week we are opening the amazing new Elizabeth line, which will transform travel for millions of Londoners. Londoners need green spaces, good design and the protection of our heritage, all of which are enshrined in my London Plan. They need access to our ever‑expanding culture, such as East Bank, where we are opening up museums, theatres and other cultural spaces.
We have achieved a lot since I became Mayor, but while I talk London up, the Government not only talks us down but by failing to provide the support we need, threatens to put all the progress made at risk. Just giving three examples, Chair, we need a long‑term sustainable funding deal for TfL to prevent the transport network from going into managed decline; we need real action from Government on the cost of living crisis, including devolving power over rent control so that we can freeze rent over the next two years; and we need proper funding for our police, addressing the £159million funding gap the Home Office itself acknowledges London is owed.
Susan Hall AM: Thank you, MrMayor. You will know AmirKhan, the very much loved AmirKhan, the former world champion boxer. AmirKhan recently said that he had planned on moving to the capital with his family, but since the robbery ‑ you will remember that shocking robbery where he was robbed at gunpoint ‑ he has changed his mind. What are you doing to make those considering London as their home feel safer? You did mention some good things that have happened, I will not deny that, but if you ask lots of people one of their number one things is they want to feel safe. I have heard people say, “I would rather be hungry than feel unsafe”. What are you going to do to make them feel safer?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Anybody who has spoken to a victim of crime, particularly a robbery, knows how distressing it is. It was incredibly distressing for Amir Khan and his wife. You have to accept that it was incredibly distressing for him. It is no consolation to him that violent crime has gone down and gun crime down by more than 30% since 2016. According to official crime figures, violent crime is going down. You are right, the perception is not going down. That is one of the reasons why trust and confidence is so important. You will have seen the metric which shows that Londoners’ trust and confidence in the MPS has been going down progressively over the last few years, which has an impact on how they feel about safety. One of the jobs that I will have with the new Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] is to address the issue of trust and confidence in police which has an impact on how they feel in London. It is one of the most important jobs we have to build trust and confidence in the police and their ability to keep us safe.
Susan Hall AM: I know you cherry-pick figures. Some figures go up, some figures go down, but some figures go up quite substantially. Now that the pandemic has passed, figures show that crime is going back up. In the financial year 2021/22 robbery was up 6.7%, theft from a person is up 89.2%, rape is up 23.85%, violence without injury is up 9.2%, and violence with injury is up 15.7%. There are other figures, but I will not go into them now. Do you think that makes anybody feels safe?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): With respect, the one in danger of cherry-picking is you, because you are comparing pandemic year figures with figures now. The true comparator‑‑
Susan Hall AM: So are you, and we pointed that out and you would not accept that. I am telling you now what the figures are and I am saying: if the figures are going up, if rape is up 23.85%, how on earth can people feel safe in London? You know that they do not.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The true comparator is either 2016, the year I became Mayor, or 2019, the year before the pandemic. As I have made clear in answer to the question, according to those comparators, crime has been going down, particularly the violent crimes. The former Chair of the Police and Crime Committee, who had to step down because of a police investigation, himself accepted earlier on during Mayor’s Question Time that the areas of crime that Londoners care about most, according to his words, were the violent crimes. That was a priority that Londoners had. That was a priority of the police service and myself. Those areas which, according to the former Chair of the Police and Crime Committee, Londoners cared about ‑ knife crime, knife crime with injury, knife crime on those below the age of 25, gun crime, burglary and so forth ‑ all of those have been going down. All of those are going up across the rest of the county and all of those are going down in London. No complacency; we have to make even more progress in those violent crimes going down.
Susan Hall AM: I will read you the comments from the wonderful world champion, AmirKhan. He said, “MayorKhan needs to pull his finger out and tackle the increasing levels of gun and knife crime. He’s making the city unliveable. You can’t drive anywhere”, we all know that is right, “traffic is horrendous”, just ask the black cabbies, “and there is no quality of life.” That comes from a world champion that we all love and admire, AmirKhan. Those points are correct, are they not? If that is how people perceive London to be, you, as the Mayor, need to address these issues. Thank you, Chair.
Dr Onkar Sahota AM (Chair): Was that a question to the Mayor?
Susan Hall AM: If he wants to answer AmirKhan, our very much loved former world champion boxer, yes, he can.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, as I have already explained, anybody who is the victim of crime does not want their crime politicised in a cheap and pathetic way by Members of the Assembly. What they want to do is make sure that their issues are heard. I have heard loud and clear what Amir has said in relation to his experience of being robbed of his expensive watch at gunpoint. The police are investigating that particular crime. We have also heard, during the course of this morning, the focus of additional resources from CityHall, not from the Government, in relation to improving sanction detection. It is no complacency to Amir to know that violent crime is going down in London.
I am incredibly proud, by the way, of our policies to improve the quality of air in London. I know it is inconvenient to the Member that she cannot drive around like she used to because you have to pay if a vehicle is polluting or if she comes into the central London area. However, I do not apologise for trying to encourage more and more Londoners to walk, cycle, use public transport or use a cleaner vehicle. We have seen in central London a reduction of 50% in relation to the toxic air.
Susan Hall AM: Thank you, MrMayor. You know full well you are using our time.
Dr Onkar Sahota AM (Chair): A question has been asked and the Mayor has a right to answer the question.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): There are 4,000 premature deaths a year because of the poor quality air. It is really important, and we are going to carry on trying to make progress in those areas. I will do what I can, working with the police and members of the community, to make progress in relation to reducing violent crime further and also to improve the toxic air in our city as well.
Susan Hall AM: Thank you, MrMayor, you are using up our time.

Assessing Mayoral Policies

Emma Best: How can you better assess the effectiveness of your policies?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am proud to have introduced policies that have directly improved Londoners’ lives since I first became Mayor in 2016. Through a record £1billion investment to plug the gap left by Government austerity, we have put 1,300 additional police officers on London streets. Gun crime, knife crime and burglary are all coming down in London, even as they continue to rise across the rest of the country. We have set up England’s first Violence Reduction Unit, which has already benefitted over 80,000 Londoners. We have already halved the level of toxic air in London through the ULEZ and other measures. We are looking to go further to protect the health of even more Londoners, particularly in outer London. We have overseen the highest number of council house starts in a generation. We, again, exceeded our affordable homes target last year. We helped over 110,000 young people with the £70million Young Londoners Fund, and we aim to reach 100,000 more in this mayoral term. These are cold, hard facts, clear evidence that our policies are the right ones and that they are effective.
We also have detailed reporting mechanisms and we have done a lot of work, including working with AssemblyMembers, to improve the quarterly reporting to the Assembly and Londoners that we inherited when I took office. These reports are now more timely, better presented, and easier to follow. Since last year they have been structured around our recovery missions, telling a clear story of how we are performing. They are published on the GLA website to ensure they can be accessed by every Londoner who wants to track our progress. We continuously evolve these reports with new metrics and measures, and we will now be exploring how we can bring together reporting across the GLA group to measure impact, making use of new digital interfaces.
My officers commission evaluations of projects and programmes to understand their effectiveness when it is appropriate to do so. We are doing this now with two of our larger investment programmes, the Adult Education Budget and the Good Growth Fund, using independent evaluators to ensure the programmes are effective. All this provides a lot of information on which to assess my performance as Mayor. Ultimately the effectiveness of my policies will be judged by Londoners themselves. I was proud to receive another vote of confidence when I was re‑elected last year. I continue to focus on delivering for the city I love.
Emma Best AM: Thank you, MrMayor. A vital part of assessing the effectiveness of policy is assessing its success against the original aims. If we take the TfL junk food ban, for example, this policy when released stated that adverts for products that would not be permitted within the network would be chocolate and cheeseburgers, amongst other items. Much like the fast food wrappers that still litter the underground, you can still see these adverts across the network. How can you consider this policy effective when it has not done what it set out to do, which is remove these adverts from our network?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The ban on advertising foods high in fats, sugar and salt has been an unparalleled success. I will make sure my office sends to the Member later on today the independent evidence which confirms what a success it has been. We could not talk about this much during the pre‑election period, but I will make sure that Members of the Assembly know what an unparalleled success it was. The ban was not of particular products, it was for products that were high in fats, sugar and salt. The good news is we have made progress in relation to children, fewer of whom are eating foods high in fats, sugar and salt. It is another example of the effectiveness of that policy. By the way, pre‑pandemic, the revenues also did not fall as some predicted they would do so.
Emma Best AM: Let me be clear again, MrMayor, I have read and understand the ban very clearly. I do not think I can share this with you, but it is an advert for Grand BigMac with Bacon, which I am going to show to AssemblyMemberBailey here, on one side of a bus stop in April2022 in Hillingdon. Another set of five bars of large chocolate is on the other side of that bus stop. They all come under what is not permitted under the ban, yet they are just one of multiple examples across the network that are still there. I ask again: if these adverts were supposed to be banned, yet they are still there, how is that effective? The adverts were supposed to be gone, but they are still there.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): That is a different question. The question is the effectiveness of the ban. The ban has been effective. The issue is: are there adverts up there that should not be up there? That is a different point. I am more than happy to look at adverts that should not be on the TfL estate that are on the TfL estate. If, for example, without naming the product, those two particular products are high in fats, sugar and salt, they should not be up there. I will make sure, Chair, that TfL are made aware of those two adverts. If there are any other adverts you are aware of‑‑
Emma Best AM: Hundreds.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Let us know where they are, and I will pass them on to the team at TfL to see whether they should be up there. If they should not be, they should be taken down.
Emma Best AM: OK. Again, I will let you know, because I would have thought that was something you would consider a success of the food ad ban if they were not there, but they are. Let us move on to the other point. This was set up specifically to tackle childhood obesity. Childhood obesity has gone up in London more than anywhere in the country. The trend across England is obesity has risen. In London it has risen more. How is that effective, when this policy was set up to tackle childhood obesity?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): There has been independent analysis of the impact of the ban on foods that are high in fats, sugar and salt. That independent analysis confirms what a success it has been. I am more than happy, as I have said in answer to a previous question, to share that with the Member who have may have missed it during the pre‑election period, for good reasons. I will make sure we publicise that more today in light of the fact that Members of the Assembly are not aware of the success of the ban. In fact, it is being emulated by cities across the globe because of the success we have had.
Emma Best AM: Thank you, MrMayor. Childhood obesity up, the adverts still on the network, the ban without any reasonable sound evidence to support it, thank you.

Ongoing coronavirus risk in London

Caroline Russell: Do we need more public health protection measures to prevent on-going coronavirus infections and reinfections?

Sadiq Khan: The latest data suggests that coronavirus rates and hospitalisations are reducing in London. This is crucial to the recovery of our city and means Londoners and visitors can get out and about to enjoy all that our capital has to offer. As we do so, everyone should continue to take common‑sense steps to protect themselves, their loved ones and their communities from COVID‑19, particularly people who are most vulnerable to serious infection. This means avoiding contact with others if you have flu‑like or COVID‑19 symptoms, continuing to wear face coverings in enclosed spaces such as on the transport network, maintaining good hand hygiene and letting in fresh air when meeting people indoors.
Similarly, the Government should be maintaining a robust testing and surveillance system to ensure fast action can be taken to protect our communities and reduce avoidable pressures on the National Health Service (NHS). I was deeply concerned to see reports of significant cuts to the United Kingdom Health Security Agency (UKHSA), which will greatly diminish our ability to identify, prevent and respond to current and future public health interests, something my Health Advisor, Dr TomCoffey, has raised in a letter to the
Deputy Chief Medical Officer.
It is also important that testing remains available and free to those who need it, so I was disappointed that the Government ended free testing in April [2022]. Testing is especially important for clinically vulnerable Londoners, people in vulnerable settings and people in inclusion health groups such as people who are homeless.
We also know that the best defence against COVID‑19 is being fully vaccinated. Londoners aged 75 and over, those in care homes, and those with weakened immune systems are now eligible for a spring COVID booster and the vaccination programme was recently expanded to 5 to 15‑year‑olds. It is never too late to come forward for vaccination, whether it is a booster or a first dose, and I encourage all Londoners to book their vaccinations to protect themselves and others against COVID‑19.
As we move forward and learn to live with COVID, we must remain vigilant and flexible. This includes not being afraid to act swiftly to bring in measures in the future, should they be needed.

Caroline Russell: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. I am going to pick up first on what you said about the need for robust testing and surveillance, and your disappointment that the free testing has been ended. Now, your Strategic Coordination Group (SCG) did great work throughout the worst of the pandemic, helping Londoners to access vaccines, food banks, opening up appropriate channels of advice and support, and doing excellent work making sure that the boroughs were effectively joined up and working together well.
Right now London is facing a new crisis, the cost of living crisis. If you wanted to buy a lateral flow test you can get them for about £2 a test at pharmacies but this is expensive for people who want to be responsible and test regularly, for people who are not covered by free tests. If someone has a chronic condition or lives with someone who does, they should not be financially penalised just because they are trying to take care of their relative. I wonder if there is a new procurement role for the SCG in making sure that affordable lateral flow tests are available to Londoners who need them but cannot afford to pay that £2 for each test. I wondered if you see any role for the SCG in working with the boroughs, trying to make more affordable tests available so that people can be responsible?

Sadiq Khan: The role of the SCG is strategic control from the centre but the suggestion, I think, from the Member is a sensible one: use procurement power to try to reduce the cost. The councils know who these families are who do not quite satisfy the safety net that the general practitioners (GPs) can provide. Can I take that away, Chair, in relation to what we could do, thinking together about not just the contacts we have with the communities, those who may miss out, but also procurement power? Without making promises, I think it is a cracking idea. I am more than happy to keep the Member updated with progress made in conversations with colleagues in the SCG.

Caroline Russell: Thank you, that is hugely appreciated, and I look forward to continuing to discuss that going forwards.
I also wanted to think about what else we can do to protect people who are clinically extremely vulnerable, and also the NHS workforce. I wanted to ask if you agree with ChrisHopson, the Chief Executive of NHS Providers, who said recently that we should bring back social distancing and masks. I was wondering what would trigger a change that would cause you to upgrade your recommendation to wear a mask on TfL services to a requirement.

Sadiq Khan: I do not agree with that suggestion. Non‑pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are something we look at all the time. The advice from the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) was that we follow the Government’s advice, and we have made the one tweak in relation to advising people on TfL, where you cannot keep your distance, to wear face coverings.
At the moment, the numbers ‑ as I have said, no complacency, always being vigilant ‑ look good. What happens is we meet regularly with public health experts in OHID to hear any concerns they have in relation to the monitoring they are doing. They keep an eye on a number of surveys taking place that tell us a more accurate number of people with COVID. The obvious numbers I saw as recently as yesterday were the
R number, admissions in hospital, the number of deaths, and those in intensive care units (ICU) from the various surveys. No reason at all to even contemplate NPIs. As I said in answer to the main question, the Government, OHID, UKHSA and ourselves keep this under review but at this stage I am not of the view that we should change the current advice.

Caroline Russell: I suppose the issue is with waning immunity and the potential then for people who have been vaccinated to end up being hospitalised. It is a question of making sure that we are looking at all those factors that you just raised, so that we know at what point we need to increase the instruction around mask‑wearing on trains.
I think what I am really worried about is that the reduced mask‑wearing on public transport is effectively shutting some Londoners out of everyday life. I was contacted just this morning by a constituent who is back in the office for the first time since 2020, and was dismayed and upset by the lack of mask‑wearing on a relatively crowded Underground train that they were travelling on. It is an accessibility and an equality issue. We have seen this rollback of lots of the health measures in the UK and across the world, but masks are still mandatory on public transport in places like Belgium, Germany and Portugal, as well as some of the cities you visited just recently such as Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York. I just wonder, without masks, how we can protect all Londoners and inspire confidence also in our visitors, who are coming for culture rather than coronavirus.

Sadiq Khan: One of the things we do know is not only is the R number down, the number of cases down and so forth, but also once the Government removed the national requirement for wearing face coverings, even though we had a requirement on TfL, the number of people wearing a face mask reduced hugely because we could not enforce the wearing of face masks. That makes it more difficult later on, if we decide to bring back these rules, for there to be enforcement because people assume, “Nobody is following the rules, why should I?” Then later on, if we needed to, we cannot do so.
As I said in answer to my previous question, both the Government and ourselves, as well as the experts, UKHSA and OHID, are keeping this under review. At the moment, nobody is advising us to change the advice on public transport.
However, as I said in answer to my question, where you cannot keep your social distance, the advice is to wear a face covering for the reasons you have suggested, so we can ensure everyone has access to public transport, which is transport for all of the public, including those who have immunity that is suppressed. I just ask people to be aware not only that there may be people around you whose immunity is suppressed, but also that you may have the virus and not realise it. One out of three of those who have this virus do not show symptoms.

Caroline Russell: Indeed. Thank you, Mr Mayor, I have no further questions, but I do hope that people keep wearing their masks on public transport because it does help more people to access everyday life.

Onkar Sahota: Mr Mayor, thank you very much for those answers. I am going to bring the question of Assembly Member Hirani up the Order Paper because it relates to coronavirus and specifically the scrapping of the free COVID‑19 testing which was raised by Assembly Member Russell.
Can we go over to that question, please. Did you, Mr Mayor, want to answer the question before–

Len Duvall: Chair, in the past we have grouped questions where it makes sense in terms of some health issues. It is not skulduggery on our part, it just makes sense to deal with it because it is a continuous flow.

Onkar Sahota: I have grouped the questions on coronavirus.

Progress Towards Driverless Trains

Tony Devenish: Given your commitment in February’s TfL Settlement Agreement that the “DfT will lead a joint programme with TfL on the implementation of Driverless Trains on the London Underground”, will you update the Assembly on plans to trial driverless tube trains?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): As set out in the most recent funding agreement with Government, the DfT is leading a joint programme with TfL to look at the possible implementation of driverless trains on the London Underground network. This work is evidence‑based and TfL is co‑operating with the Government, as it is required to do. This is a technically complex area and will take significant investment and a long time to implement. TfL will never compromise on safety. I am advised that the introduction of driverless trains would require new rolling stock, new signalling and other infrastructure, such as platform‑edged doors, to meet safety requirements. What this means in practice is that there is absolutely no scope for short‑term operational cost savings through this means and that the upfront costs would have to be covered by a further capital commitment from the Government.
Driverless trains would require billions of pounds of upfront investment and are not a priority for TfL. The focus should instead be on investment in renewing and enhancing existing trains, such as on the Bakerloo line, where trains serving the Member’s constituency turned 50 this year; the oldest rolling stock in the UK.
Our priority should be investing in the safety and reliability of the current network and improving and decarbonising existing infrastructure and services.
TfL contracts contribute around £7billion to the UK economy and support tens of thousands of jobs around the country. The UK’s recovery from the pandemic requires London to recover strongly and without a properly funded transport network in the capital that recovery is at risk. Despite the extreme financial challenges caused by the pandemic, I have already set out a range of proposals that will help support TfL’s financial sustainability in the near future. It is essential that an agreement is reached with the Government on longer‑term capital funding, so we can keep our city moving and avoid a managed decline scenario.
Tony Devenish AM: Good afternoon, MrMayor.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Good afternoon.
Tony Devenish AM: Do you recognise the potential benefits though of driverless operation in terms of maximising the efficiency of Tube services and a number of trains per hour, please?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): In a theoretical sense, of course. Just as you would, at the same time, in a theoretical sense, accept the downsides as well.
Tony Devenish AM: Why is it I am not convinced you are really in favour of this? Perhaps we could turn to the reason. Do you think that you are effectively agreeing with the Rail, Maritime and Transport Union (RMT) on this, rather than looking at the evidence that hopefully is forthcoming?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, I am being asked to mindread why the Member thinks I appear not to be in favour of something, which is beyond even my ability. Secondly, he asked me for my views on the RMT, which again are outside my remit. I am quite clear in relation to the evidence I have been given about the upfront costs of this. The DfT are leading on this piece of work and the TfL are fully cooperating. Why do we not wait and see what the DfT come up with in relation to this joint programme of work that is evidence‑based, that they are doing.
Tony Devenish AM: Possibly, you may be looking to appease the RMT. Can I just raise one slightly tangential point, MrMayor. You talked earlier, quite rightly, about Her Majesty [The Queen] and how on Tuesday we both enjoyed the visit. It is [Her Majesty] The Queen’s Jubilee next week and, of course, you have seen in the papers that the RMT are looking to shut both Euston and Green Park Tube stations next week. Your record on strikes is not great. Are you going to be able to stop them closing those two stations and disrespecting Her Majesty?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The good news is my record on industrial action is far superior to the previous guy. The trade union should get back around the table.
I am against this strike. It sends all the wrong messages at a time when we are encouraging commuters back to central London, at a time when we are encouraging people across the globe to celebrate Her Majesty’s Platinum Jubilee. These two stations potentially ‑ I say potentially ‑ being closed because of industrial action is good for nobody. I would encourage the RMT to call off this industrial action.
Tony Devenish AM: We can agree for once, MrMayor, but you are Chairman of TfL so will you be spending any of your time in the next few days making sure that happens, please?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): It is really important for the TfL negotiators to do their job, but I would encourage the RMT to get back around the table. I could not have been clearer in answer to you, in a public forum, in relation to my views of the RMT’s industrial action planned for Her Majesty’s celebrations. It is really important the RMT understand the consequences of their actions in relation to people potentially being put off coming to celebrate, which would be heartbreaking for them. Many have been looking forward to this celebration for a while. You and I both enjoyed seeing Her Majesty in person. I do not want people not to come for fear of industrial action, who want to see her in person as well.
Tony Devenish AM: I hope you will get involved, MrMayor, because you are the Mayor of London. It is absolutely important that this industrial action does not take place and we all enjoy [Her Majesty] The Queen’s Jubilee. Thank you.

Vision Zero

Neil Garratt: Is your “Vision Zero” plan to eliminate road deaths in London a serious endeavour or a publicity stunt?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sadly, too many people continue to be injured and killed on London’s roads, and every death and serious injury is a tragedy. Safer streets are fundamental to my vision of a city where people can travel easily, sustainably and actively, and where the noise, pollution, carbon and community impacts of motor transport are minimised. Vision Zero is an internationally recognised approach adopted by cities across the world. Since introducing the Vision Zero goal, both deaths and serious injuries in London have fallen faster than the national average. By 2020, the number of people killed or seriously injured on London’s roads had reduced by 52% against the Government baseline. Particularly vulnerable groups such as children saw a 74% reduction in deaths and serious injuries over that period. In short, the Vision Zero goal is helping us to make our streets safer.
As part of this work, we have introduced the world’s first Direct Vision Standard, which has led to around 112,000 heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) already being fitted with improved safety technologies. We have also introduced a ground‑breaking Bus Safety Standard mandating the latest safety technologies and design on all new buses. As a result, more than 1,900 buses across London now have Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA). The number of people injured on or by a bus has fallen significantly, in line with our targets. TfL has continued to work on its Healthy Streets programme while making improvements to 43 of London’s most dangerous junctions, introduced 260kms of cycle lanes, and introduced safer speeds on TfL roads.
TfL take an active role in investigating serious bus incidents with local authorities and bus operators, aiming to find the root cause of each incident. The entire bus safety programme is evidence‑led, and TfL is continuously adding to this evidence base. This evidence‑based approach is delivering results, but despite this progress our goal is zero and there is still a lot more work that needs to be done. Collective action is needed now to eliminate deaths and serious injuries from London’s roads. TfL, London’s boroughs and the police are all intensifying efforts to achieve this critical goal by continuing to make our streets safe.

Neil Garratt: Thank you, Mr Mayor. My question was whether it is a serious endeavour or whether it is a publicity stunt. The reason I ask that question: in the figure you quoted about a 52% reduction, the baseline that you have used is a classic example of firing an arrow and then painting a target round it, which is what people do when they want to have a publicity statement and not when they are making serious progress.
The baseline that you have is 2004 to 2009. You are claiming the credit for your Vision Zero for all of the improvement since then. During that baseline, just to take us back on a little history tour, KenLivingstone was the Mayor and [The Rt Hon] Tony Blair, for most of your baseline period, was the Prime Minister, which is quite a while ago now, and all of the improvement that happened since then you are claiming credit for in the figures that you state. Would it not be more honest to baseline your figure, of the improvement that you claim for your programme, from comparison with the years immediately before your programme started?

Sadiq Khan: The aggregate numbers speak for themselves. I am not sure your analogy or metaphor of the arrow and the bullseye works.

Neil Garratt: Perhaps if I can clarify.

Sadiq Khan: Yes.

Neil Garratt: Steve Reed, one of the Members of Parliament (MPs) in my patch, was the
Shadow Lord Chancellor for most of the period. I do not know how much credit you give him for the improvement in road safety in London. For most of the time when the improvements that you are claiming credit for were happening, you were the Shadow Lord Chancellor. You were an MP; you were not involved in this organisation. Between 2010 and 2015 there were large improvements. Most of the improvements that you are claiming in road safety happened during that period, and you are now claiming them for your
Vision Zero project. Does that not seem dishonest?

Sadiq Khan: Given the figures were 2019 and 2020‑‑

Neil Garratt: Compared with the baseline when [The Rt Hon] Tony Blair was Prime Minister when you publish your figures, you compare them with the baseline which is 2004 to 2009.

Sadiq Khan: Right.

Neil Garratt: Why did you choose that period?

Sadiq Khan: That was the period the Department for Transport (DfT) had been using.

Neil Garratt: However, you are not obligated to follow that, you could publish figures based on‑‑

Sadiq Khan: So we should ignore what the DfT‑‑

Neil Garratt: No, you can give them the figures that they request. However, when you tell Londoners about the improvements that you are making, should you not compare it with the years before you started and the years during your term of office? Would that not be more honest?

Sadiq Khan: I have just given you the 2019/20 figure, which by definition‑‑

Neil Garratt: OK, but the 2020 figures are during the pandemic. When you publish figures for
Vision Zero, will we be seeing then a comparison with, say, a baseline of 2015‑2017, which was just before it started?

Sadiq Khan: Right. There is a separate point, which I am willing to take on board, that we should be challenging and that we should not try to just satisfy an arbitrary target by using figures so we can always tick, tick, tick. I am happy to go away, Chair, to have stretching targets. That is a good challenge.

Neil Garratt: Honest targets is what I am asking for.

Sadiq Khan: Well, no, we follow the DfT advice and you are now unhappy because we are doing well against the DfT advice. What I am saying to you is I take the pat on the back, and I am willing to have more stretching targetsbecause it leads to‑‑

Neil Garratt: The pat on the back goes to [former] Mayor [The Rt Hon Boris] Johnson [MP],who was Mayor during that period.

Sadiq Khan: That would be a good point if numbers were going up. The numbers are going down, which means the credit goes to MayorKhan, not MayorJohnson, in relation to deaths and serious injuries.
Listen, I am willing to go halfway. I am willing to say we should have stretching targets because both of our aspirations are to reduce deaths or serious injuries. You can just park the knockabout stuff for a second. What I am saying to you is I am willing to come back with more stretching targets because I think you make a fair point that our expectations in 2022 should be different to what the DfT asks us to do with the baseline figure. That is a fair observation if you park the knockabout stuff.

Neil Garratt: Is that the baseline that we will now see published, the baseline of when you started your Vision Zero programme?

Sadiq Khan: No, what I have said I want to do is look at where we can have more stretching targets because quite clearly, we are meeting the objectives set by the DfT and what [former] MayorJohnson was doing. I am saying, let us try to be more stretching because I want zero deaths sooner rather than later. What I am saying to you is in the spirit of working together because, hopefully, both of us want to see reduced deathsrather than knockabout stuff‑‑

Neil Garratt: Yesand honest claims about improvements that you have made and not your predecessor.

Sadiq Khan: If he is going to start being silly, Chair, I will respond by saying‑‑

Neil Garratt: Let us end it there. Thank you, Chair.

Sadiq Khan: ‑‑ we are making progress, we have made better progress than the previous guy and I will carry on doing better than the previous guy.
Neil Garratt AM: Not true.

Onkar Sahota: AssemblyMemberGarratt, you have asked the question and the Mayor has answered it. Let us move on.

Rapid reductions in London’s carbon emissions

Zack Polanski: Scientists have warned us that it is ‘now or never’ to stop runaway warming of the climate. How will you ensure that there are rapid, deep and immediate reductions in London’s climate emissions?

Sadiq Khan: The scientists are right; we must act now. The scale of the challenge ahead requires us all to act together. There is no silver bullet and there is no single tier of government or organisation that can solve this problem alone. That is why the London Recovery Board’s
Green New Deal mission brings together London’s boroughs and other key stakeholders to work together to reduce emissions. Our net zero pathway shows where the rapid, deep emission reductions must come from. Our buildings must be more energy‑efficient, using fully renewable electricity and clean heat technologies like heat pumps. Public transport and active travel need to be even more accessible and we must transition rapidly to zero emission vehicles.
I will do everything in my power to accelerate all these changes and I am ensuring my functional bodies lead by example, implementing bold, zero‑carbon building policies in my London Plan and expanding the ULEZ. We must transform our existing buildings. We have an energy and cost of living crisis and yet the Government is unwilling to accelerate action on energy efficiency that would help tackle rising fuel poverty, reduce exposure to volatile fossil fuel prices and deliver emissions reductions. I continue to call on the Government to devolve powers and funding for energy efficiency to me and other metro mayors, and to introduce a windfall tax on profiteering energy companies to fund support for people struggling through this crisis.
Since 2020, my retrofit programmes have helped secure more than £221million from the Government and my public sector retrofit programme has improved over 500 buildings since 2016, saving 20,000 tonnes of carbon. My Innovation Partnership is connecting social landlords and UK building firms to develop social housing retrofit solutions at scale, driving up skills and driving down costs. Last November [2021] I announced £30million to support my Mayor’s Energy Efficiency Fund, and in February[2022] I announced £90million for the development and delivery of a net zero project pipeline. This will initially be financed through the issue of a £500million green bond, which will form the first phase of my financing facility for London. I will continue to do everything in my power and encourage everyone to do the same.

Zack Polanski: Thank you very much, MrMayor. I want to begin by applauding your statement that we have to listen to the scientists and the scientists are right. I wish more senior politicians in the public eye would start from that premise.
The science suggests we have three important dates. We have 2030, the date by which you have set to get to net zero. There is the date 2025, which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has set, that says, “It is now or never”. We have to get to the peak of emissions and that is the turning point. Then there is a third date, which is a political date, 2024. That is the end of your current term. The maths suggests that if we are going to get to net zero by 2030, by the end of 2024 you have to pretty much be halfway there.
I met campaigners this morning outside City Hall who are campaigning on insulation, and they have written an open letter to you with several organisations. I agree with something you will inevitably say, that the Government needs to do more on this, and we are in total agreement with that. My question to you is: what will you take responsibility for and what will you do in the next year?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for your question and thank you for your support on this area. The constant chivvying ‑ in a constructive way ‑ of the Green Group is really helpful, and of the Liberal Democrat Group as well, actually, in this area. We are doing a number of things and I mentioned the Green New Deal mission because that is a tangible example in relation to what we can do. Just to give you an idea of what we are doing, I mentioned briefly in my answer some of the leveraging money we are doing in relation to the Government, which is helping us with this part of the work we are doing. What we are doing with the Green New Deal mission is, for example, working with local councils on whether we can leverage in money to support them in relation to retrofitting some of their homes. That will reduce the bills of their tenants but also reduce carbon emissions as well. That target, for obvious reasons, because of the four‑year cycle, is 2025, but we would hope to make significant progress by the deadline you have given, which is 2024.
The good news is if we get the foundations right now, there is an exponential growth once we get these policies in place. Although we may not get the progress in terms of on a pro rata basis over the next eight years, the halfway point by 2024, once you start these things moving it is like a hockey stick curve; it really does go up swiftly. That is why it is really important to get the foundations right and that is why the
London Recovery Board having as one of its nine missions the Green New Deal does give a source of hope and optimism.

Zack Polanski: Yes, and something the campaigners have been arguing for is people to be skilled to do these things. In 2021, I think 14,000 was the estimate and you are wanting to get to 57,000 by 2024. That is four times current employment. What are your plans to train more people pretty quickly?

Sadiq Khan: I am grateful you give me a chance to mention once again what I announced at the top of the item, which is the Skills Bootcamp. The Skills Bootcamp is one example, which I announced today, the £80million, where we will be skilling up Londoners in future‑proofed jobs, which is really important. The other big announcement we made is in relation to the Mayor’s Academies Programme. One of the things I welcome is the Government devolving to us the Adult Education Budget, which means we can focus the further education sector on the sectors where we know there is a skills shortage but also where there are future‑proofed jobs. As you have alluded to, the green economy is one of those areas: electric vehicle charging points, solar, wind installation, but also in relation to some of the work that needs to be done in relation to retrofitting as well. We have to make these jobs enticing and so we are working with people who work in the sector to go into schools and do assemblies, and we are also focusing on primary schools as well. One of the lessons I learnt when I went to Goole recently was, they are working with primary schools to make sure people at a young age can see these jobs and can aspire towards them as well.

Zack Polanski: Thank you. Moving on to flights now, we have had two reports in the last couple of weeks, one from the charity Possible and one from the Aviation Environment Federation. They have both said that the Government is essentially failing to meet its climate reduction targets on aviation or flying. That is where the airline industry is out of control because it is not meeting its own targets and it is marking its own homework. Would you agree with me that to get to net zero by 2050, which is the UK’s environmental target, is completely incompatible with any aviation expansion?

Sadiq Khan: To be fair, I have not read but I was interested by the headlines where the Secretary of State for Transport in the last few days has done some work with, I think, PeteButtigieg [United States Secretary of Transportation] in America, in relation to this area. I do not want to mislead the Assembly. I think there is some work the Government is doing in relation to aviation, to give credit to the Government, which is unlike me. I have not read that full report yet but I think we are, as a country, looking at what we can do in relation to carbon emissions from aviation, subject to what the Government has said there. Of course, we need to make more progress in relation to reducing carbon emissions from aviation and all sectors.

Zack Polanski: You did say earlier this year, “I fail to see how any airport expansion can be justified, being incompatible with achieving the UK’s net zero target”. Do you still stand by that?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, there are two separate discussions. One is the expansion. I am against expansion and you know my views in relation to Runway3 [Heathrow Expansion]. There is a separate discussion about how we can reduce carbon emissions from what we have and that is the work that the Government is doing. My understanding is ‑ and, again, I have not read the full report ‑ that our
Secretary of State for Transport went to America and has signed an agreement with the US Secretary of State for Transportation in relation to what we can do, working together, to incentivise the reduction of carbon emissions. Again, I have not read the full report but that does bode well in relation to not simply focusing on reducing expansion but making progress with those in aviation and how they can be encouraged, enticed or incentivised to reduce the emissions that they already have.

Zack Polanski: Brilliant. Well, we have some ideas there. I note that you thank us for chivvying you along on various things. I have noticed your drug policy is now being inspired by Green policy and also on road user charging. Would you now take up our policy of a frequent flyer levy?

Sadiq Khan: I am not sure what that policy is, but I am more than happy for you to speak to me in relation to what that is.

Zack Polanski: Essentially, 15% of people take 70% of the flights and it is saying, essentially, the polluter pays. This is not going after people’s family holidays or someone going on one business trip, this is about the small amount of people who frequently fly and making sure that we are not subsidising aviation but actually we are subsidising trains. Presumably, that would be something you would be very interested in.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I am more than happy to speak with the Member offline to discuss these things. Just to reassure Londoners, we actually often do get on, on this sort of stuff, and do have conversations. Sometimes they are animated; sometimes they are less so. It is a good example of looking for the best ideas. We do not want to be an administration that, just because of the colour of the party you belong to, it does not mean we do not talk to you. We do, and we listen as well. Can I take that away and ask colleagues in my team to speak to the Member to see any ideas he has in this area?

Zack Polanski: I really appreciate your collegiality on this. I have no further questions.

Cost of living and London’s economy

Marina Ahmad: What impact has the cost of living crisis had on London’s economy to date?

Sadiq Khan: First and foremost, the spiralling cost of living carries a severe economic cost for Londoners and I am deeply concerned about the impact of this crisis on people across the capital. Inflation is currently north of 9% and is set to be as high as 10% this year, and Londoners have already been hit with a 54% rise in energy costs last month. As a result, more Londoners already face an impossible choice between heating their homes and paying for other essentials like food, while average asking rents rose 14% in the last year, adding to the squeeze.
This crisis will hit the worst‑off Londoners the hardest. London faces the worst inequality in the country. The lowest‑income 10% of Londoners take home 30% less than the lowest‑income 10% in the rest of the UK, and London has the highest share of its population on Universal Credit of any region. Welfare benefits went up last month but only by around 3%, compared to likely inflation of around 9%. This tightens the squeeze on the lowest‑income Londoners.
The spiralling cost of living will also have a wider economic impact. High inflation drags down real incomes, cutting demand and slowing economic growth. Consumer confidence has turned negative in London, while business confidence about the future is also trending down. Just as economic activity in London had recovered, the cost of living crisis is now impacting spending. London’s retailers face a tough year ahead, with activity in the sector likely to fall across 2022. Sharply falling real incomes across the UK prompted a drop in March gross domestic product (GDP), with retail sales driving the fall. The Bank of England forecast economic activity coming close to recession late this year and unfortunately London is unlikely to escape the damage.

Marina Ahmad: Mr Mayor, thank you for reminding us that London is the region with the highest level of deprivation in the country and is therefore particularly affected by the cost of living crisis. Londoners will be concerned that as people stop spending, businesses might lay off staff. What conversations are you having with business about the support they need to prevent unemployment at a time when Londoners are already worried about keeping a roof over their heads?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for your question. Both the Deputy Mayor for Business, RajeshAgrawal, and myself, and other members of the team, speak regularly to businesses, business leaders and business organisations, and we are trying to do what we can with the limited resources we have. The three big fora where we get to spend time around the table with businesses are the Business Advisory Board, the London COVID Business Forum ‑ I will be chairing another meeting later on this afternoon of the Forum ‑ and the London Recovery Board.
The big ask business communities have in hospitality and retail is support with business rates relief. That would really help them in the short to medium term. Also, discounted value-added tax (VAT) and direct grant funding. These things helped them during the worst parts of the lockdown. We are lobbying the Government in relation to all three of those areas as well. What we have done is made sure we have updated the
London Business Hub, which is a one‑stop shop for businesses. They can go here for real‑time advice, including signposting to other sources of help. I know small businesses have taken advantage of that in huge numbers, and we are encouraging others to as well. We listened carefully to the speech by the
Chancellor [of the Exchequer] last night at the Confederation of British Industry (CBI). Unfortunately, there was nothing in there for our businesses in the short term. We are hoping that our lobbying pays off in the short to medium term.

Marina Ahmad: Thank you. Mr Mayor, what action are you taking to prevent further damage to the Central Activities Zone (CAZ) as people have to tighten their belts?

Sadiq Khan: This is a big concern we have because the CAZ, those six boroughs, contributes disproportionately in positive terms, to the Treasury in relation to monies they bring in. The key sectors being retail, hospitality and culture. That was one of the reasons for the delegation last week to the United States of America (USA). Our target is international tourists, firstly from the USA ‑ that is the important place for us ‑ then France and Germany. Realistically, because of the pandemic in the Far East, we do not think we will be getting visitors from the Far East this year because of the rules they have there.
We lost in 2020, those businesses in the CAZ, north of £10billion. If we can get some of that back this year, that would help. Frankly speaking, Her Majesty The Queens’s Platinum Jubilee is a really good way to attract people to our country and we are hoping to make the most of that. We are working closely with the six boroughs in relation to a joint action plan and we are also working with Central London Forward in relation to what we can do together regarding the CAZ. The good news is that other parts of London appreciate the importance of the CAZ and so London Councils are working really closely with us as well, but we are worried about potentially an existential threat to our city centre if the CAZ does not recover sooner rather than later.

Marina Ahmad: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. Thank you, Chair.

Neurodiversity in London

Andrew Boff: Will you work with businesses and experts in the field to ensure London leads the way on being Neurodiversity friendly?

Sadiq Khan: Ensuring that London is an accessible and inclusive city in line with the social model of disability is very important to me as Mayor. Neurodiverse people have many strengths that should be recognised and celebrated. However, I know there are many individuals across London who are excluded and disabled by inaccessible employment, transport and education systems. Overcoming these barriers requires action across a range of different areas.
Transport for London (TfL) has specific objectives to improve the accessibility and inclusivity of London’s transport network. As part of this, it is rolling out disability equality training to staff with specific modules on supporting neurodiverse customers and developing the first set of guidance on standards for the design of the built environment that considers the needs of neurodiverse people.
I have supported schools to have a greater understanding of neurodiversity through my Inclusive Education Toolkit. Through the Adult Education Budget I have made provision for teachers and staff to be upskilled to better support neurodiverse learners.
Employers can also help close the disability employment gap by making the world of work more accessible for neurodiverse Londoners. My Good Work Standard requires employers to look at reasonable adjustment policies that consider the needs of all their current and future staff. This is an area where it is important to lead by example, and I am proud that we at the Greater London Authority (GLA) have adopted neurodiversity‑friendly policies. Working with our disabled staff network, we have developed a strong workplace adjustment policy which helps to address barriers neurodiverse staff face in the workplace. Staff training includes case studies on neurodiversity and all staff have access to a neurodiversity toolkit. The Steps into Work programme we run with TfL helps neurodiverse students aged 16 or over to get into the world of work.
Throughout all these work areas and others, it will be vital to engage with those who have lived experience and professional expertise, as well as officer engagement with national charities and user‑led organisations focused on neurodiversity. My Deputy Mayor for Communities and Social Justice holds a quarterly forum for Deaf and disabled people’s organisations to ensure their views and experiences inform the design and delivery of my policies and programmes. The London Recovery Board will soon launch its action plan to tackle structural inequality. We have ensured that there will be ample opportunities for individuals and organisations with expertise on neurodiversity to play a part in the delivery of this work.

Andrew Boff: With approximately one in ten individuals estimated to be neurodivergent in the population at large in Greater London, that means there are approximately 900,000 Londoners with neurodivergent conditions. One‑tenth of those are possibly autistic, about 88,000, and with just 16% of autistic adults being in paid work this means that around 74,000 autistic people in London are not in paid employment. While there is limited information about other neurodivergent conditions in employment data, there are general estimates that suggest nationally up to only 20% of neurodivergent individuals are in employment. This means that there are potentially as many as 700,000 people in Greater London who are available to work if they have the right support.
Neurodiversity in Business launched in Parliament in March[2022] with over 100 organisations committed to building neuro‑inclusive workplaces, including most of London’s largest corporates. Will you, Mr Mayor, meet with this forum and agree how London can lead the world to improve acceptance of neurodiversity?

Sadiq Khan: I would love to. Thank you for raising the points the way you raised them, Assembly Member Boff. I am more than happy to. Your figures are stark; in fact, my figures are even starker than yours, I had one in five.

Andrew Boff: I am a Conservative.

Sadiq Khan: I am grateful to you for raising those points, Andrew. I am more than happy to not just meet with the group but I would also, if you have the time, suggest that Dr Debbie Weekes‑Bernard [Deputy Mayor for Communities and Social Justice], who has done lots of work on this‑‑ we are launching very soon the Structural Inequalities Action Plan and any advice you have would be appreciated. Just to reassure you though, we do meet the specialist groups both in London and across the country. I am more than happy to meet Neurodiversity in Business for the obvious reasons you have suggested. It is a no‑brainer. I also love your point about London being a world leader. I think we should be a world leader in this area, particularly as we have Londoners with huge potential that is not being tapped.

Andrew Boff: In order to achieve that aim, Mr Mayor, the Assembly, back in February 2020, unanimously agreed that you should develop an all‑age Londonwide autism strategy to be included in your
Health Inequalities Strategy. What is happening to that?

Sadiq Khan: We have gone further than that. I looked again at the report that you talked about in preparation for Mayor’s Question Time. Hopefully you will welcome the
Structural Inequalities Action Plan. There are 14 separate actions in there on the theme of labour market equality. Once you have had a chance to look at that, which is out imminently ‑ I do not want to give a date away in case it is wrong ‑ if there are still issues that you think are missing, I am more than happy to look at what more work we need to do.
To reassure you, Assembly Member Boff, the work that you will see the fruits of with the Action Plan is not just City Hall, that is working across London, it is the voluntary and community sector, it is councils, it is the private sector, but it is also the GLA functional bodies as well: TfL, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), and so forth.

Andrew Boff: That told me what you are doing but it did not talk about the strategy. What strategy is there? This was a specific request of the Assembly. The reason, as an Assembly, we requested that there be a specific strategy on neurodiversity, not just lumped in with other conditions, is that we feel it could be lost amongst the other conditions. Where is the strategy? Are you going to have an autism strategy or a neurodiversity strategy?

Sadiq Khan: I think the concern ‑ again, this is one of the reasons I am more than happy for you to meet with Dr Debbie Weekes‑Bernard ‑ is that neurodiversity is a small part of the social model of disabilities we are seeking to address, addressing physical, cognitive and sensory impairments that Londoners have. I think the concern was that a narrow strategy just on neurodiversity would not do justice to all the other social models of disability. Again, once you have had a chance to see the Action Plan, which is the strategy, if you like, and what it means in implementation, if you are still unhappy, again, I am more than happy‑‑ it is not a closed door, just to reassure you. I am more than happy, if you think there are more things that can be added to the strategy, to discuss those with you. I think you will welcome the Action Plan.

Andrew Boff: When will we see that Action Plan?

Sadiq Khan: In typical civil service speak, very soon. Can I get back to you today to give you privately the exact date? You will appreciate that dates change but I will give you privately the date I have been told. My briefing says “shortly”, “very soon”.

Andrew Boff: OK. Thank you.

Motorcycle safety

Keith Prince: What recent actions have you taken to increase motorcyclist and scooter rider safety in London?

Sadiq Khan: Reducing risk to the most vulnerable road users in London is central to my Vision Zero Action Plan. People riding motorcycles, including mopeds and scooters, make up only 3% of vehicle kilometres but, tragically, accounted for 32% of people killed on London’s roads in 2020. Despite severe funding constraints caused by COVID and the lack of a deal with the Government, TfL continues to invest in safety improvements that benefit all vulnerable road users, including those using motorcycles and scooters.
The vast majority of TfL bus lanes are open to motorcyclists, and many have recently been made operational 24 hours a day. Where the bus lanes are under control of the relevant borough, TfL has been working with councils to encourage them to open their bus lanes to motorcyclists. I know that the AssemblyMember has campaigned for this, and I thank him for his support. TfL’s Safer Junctions programme has delivered tangible results for all users with an average 18% reduction in injuries to motorcyclists at these junctions. TfL funds marketing campaigns to remind road users to look out for motorcyclists. It also continues to offer a range of free safety training courses to help motorcyclists stay safe and has delivered over 4,000 motorcycle training and Beyond Compulsory Basic Training (CBT): Skills for Delivery Riders courses. TfL also works closely with the MPS to deliver BikeSafe training.
However, we know there is more that can and needs to be done. Motorcycles with engines under 125cc require the lowest minimum standard of training of any motorised vehicle on the road. I do not believe the current national training regime is sufficient to equip riders for the risks and challenges of driving vehicles capable of speeds of up to 80 miles per hour in a complex urban environment whilst keeping both the rider and other road users safe. The food delivery industry has more than doubled since the beginning of 2020, which has led to a rise in new registrations of small engine scooters, but we know that the vast majority of these riders have only completed basic training and so are riding on learner plates. TfL has been directly engaging with the companies involved, encouraging them to subscribe to a common minimum standard to keep their riders safe and to reduce the risks motorcyclists face on London’s roads. I am determined to reduce danger for all road users and TfL will continue to do everything it can to ensure that all riders are safe.

Keith Prince: Thank you, MrMayor, for that very comprehensive answer and all the work that you are doing around motorcycle safety and the regular meetings that we have. Could I just quickly also thank you for the progress that is being made at Gallows Corner? It looks as though we may have a solution there. You did come and visit us within the first month of you being elected and said you would do something. Albeit it has taken six years, it does look like we are making progress so thank you for that.
It is not a trick question, but are you aware of the organisation called New Rider Hub? Are you aware of that, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: I do not think so, no.

Keith Prince: It is an organisation that offers free online training and advice to new motorcyclists and scooter users. Firstly, I wonder if you would be able to help raise awareness of this organisation because of the good work it does. Also, they have this new [National] Young Rider Forum and there are a number of organisations that belong to it, but unfortunately neither the GLA nor TfL have representation on the group. Is it possible that you could look into that and, hopefully, get some representation on that forum, too, please?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, my experience is the Member normally has good suggestions. I am more than happy to take this up and ask the Deputy Mayor for Transport to look into this.

Keith Prince: We will write to the Deputy Mayor.

Sadiq Khan: Thank you very much.

Keith Prince: Thank you.

ULEZ Expansion consultation launch

Leonie Cooper: With your consultation on the proposed London-wide ULEZ launching in May, how will you ensure that views, comments and concerns are heard from all communities across London?

Sadiq Khan: I am determined that we make even more progress in addressing the triple challenges of reducing transport emissions to protect the health of Londoners, working towards the net zero carbon emissions and cutting congestion. There is more to do, particularly in outer London. More than half of the 500,000 Londoners who suffer from asthma live in outer London, and all areas of London still exceed safe levels of pollution. If no further action is taken to reduce air pollution, the cost to the NHS and social care system in London is estimated to be £10.4 billion by 2050.
This is also a matter of social justice. Londoners on lower incomes and from Black, Asian and ethnic minority communities are more likely to live in areas more affected by air pollution, but are less likely to own a car. I want to hear views from all Londoners and all London’s diverse communities as part of this consultation. TfL will deliver a comprehensive marketing and engagement plan which will ensure as many people as possible are aware of the consultation. This will include radio adverts across London and the home counties, national and regional press adverts, targeted commercial van and car drivers and online podcast and YouTube advertising.
Inclusion and accessibility are at the heart of TfL’s approached consultation. Consultation materials will be provided in easy read, braille and large formats, accompanied by a British Sign Language video. A consultation phone line will be available to address questions from people unable to access information online. TfL has undertaken extensive stakeholder mapping to ensure that engagement is targeted at the right community groups, including local accessibility and parent groups, NHS staff, patient groups and patient transport organisations, and third sector organisations including local charities and voluntary groups. TfL will also engage with schools, faith groups, business groups and elected representatives, including AssemblyMembers who represent affected areas. These organisations and representatives will be contacted from the consultation launch to have their say. They will also be offered the opportunity to attend briefing sessions with TfL to make sure they get the information they need and that their voices are heard.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. It is good to hear that there is going to be such diverse and widespread consultation. I remember back to six years ago in 2016 when we first started the consultation and discussion of air quality in London around the original Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ), implemented in central London and then expanded currently to the North and South Circular Roads.
One of the things that concerns me is that there is still a view in some parts of outer London that the issues relating to poor air quality do not affect people in outer London as much as in inner London. It is going to be really important to make sure that that information is widespread to all those who are going to be contributing. How will you make sure that that information is widely propagated so that people do understand why this is even being considered at all?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, it is a really important point, Chair, raised by the Member. We have to get across that this is not just an environmental crisis, it is a health crisis. One of the things that we have done is learn from previous consultations, and I hope you will agree this iteration of consultation is far wider than previous ones. If Members of the Assembly, particularly those who represent outer London constituencies, have advice or views, TfL will be more than happy to listen to those as well. I hope you are a bit reassured in relation to the breadth of techniques used by TfL to take this forward, and that they have learnt the lessons of the past.
We have learnt as well about how we get across the explanation for why ULEZ, as a policy, is being expanded. We can point to ‑ which we could not do in 2016 and 2017 ‑ the evidence of central London ULEZ and inner London ULEZ in relation to the progress we have made and improvements that there have been. You are right that we have to make sure that people understand that this is addressing health inequalities, as well as the environmental and economic issues that the policy also does as well. It does not solve just one problem, it addresses a number.

Léonie Cooper: One issue for many people in outer London, just as I remember when the original scheme was coming in, is going to be about access to scrappage. Obviously, transitioning from people’s individual arrangements for travelling around at the moment, to contributing in a different way to air improvement is going to be really important. I wondered if you could tell us whether or not, this time, we are going to get some support to Londoners from Government. There has been support to so many other cities. Are we going to get help this time? It is a massive problem for lots of people across the whole of London. What help can we expect?

Sadiq Khan: It is worth reminding the Government that it will not meet the legal targets it has to meet unless London meets our targets. It is in the Government’s interest ‑ aside from the health, economic, social and environmental reasons ‑ to work with us, to avoid falling foul of legal challenges. It is in the Government’s interest for London to succeed. You will be aware that the £61 million in the scrappage scheme that we paid Londoners to take more than 15,000 vehicles off the road came solely from TfL and London. We got no support from the Government, unlike other cities across the country with their
Clean Air Zones.
We are lobbying the Government, in relation to the long‑term capital deal with them, to ensure there is some money for a scrappage scheme. We think the Government would welcome expanding ULEZ because it saves the NHS money and increases productivity. It also means the Government can meet its legal obligations. Those are some of the conversations the Commissioner needs to be having with the Secretary of State for Transport, at Number 10, and the Treasury.
As of yet, we have six weeks until the capital deal comes to an end. Those conversations are ongoing. We do not know the outcome of those conversations, but we are hoping there is support from the Government in relation to scrappage schemes so that small business people, local families, disabled Londoners, charities and many others can benefit from a scrappage scheme that enables them to transition from a polluting vehicle to one that is ULEZ‑compliant.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor, that is very helpful.

Action on the Building Safety Crisis

Hina Bokhari: What further action will you be taking to ensure developers take responsibility for the Building Safety Crisis?

Sadiq Khan: The building safety crisis has been caused by systemic failings across the board and, nearly five years after the Grenfell Tower fire, there are still thousands of Londoners who do not feel safe in their own homes. The Grenfell Tower Inquiry has been forensic in putting a spotlight on the practices of the whole construction industry: developers, but also product manufacturers, testers, certifiers and, of course, the Government. We have heard evidence suggesting the deregulatory agenda and deprioritisation of building safety led to the Government presiding over an unclear and unenforced building safety regime.
Following my calls for a levy on developers back in December2020, I welcome the Government’s progress in ensuring the big developers pay their fair share, but developers are not the only ones to blame. Culpability lies along the entire chain. Systemic failures led to this national crisis, and it requires a long‑term national Government‑led solution. We need long‑lasting Government reform that will deliver a stronger regulatory framework, improve the competency and skills of those within the industry and a culture change that puts fire safety first. I will continue to put pressure on Ministers to ensure these reforms happen.
Where I have powers, I have taken action to help drive the change needed. My ground‑breaking London Plan now ensures that fire safety is considered at the earliest stages of planning for a building. New homes on GLA land commissioned via my Development Panel and new homes funded by the Affordable Homes Programme 2021‑2026 are required to meet higher standards than the Government’s building regulations. I have taken steps to help shared owners in buildings with building safety defects move on with their lives by changing the GLA’s policy on subletting. I recently published best practice guidance, which has been adopted by all members of the G15 group of housing associations, to improve how leaseholders navigate the External Wall System One (EWS1) process.
It is nearly five years since Grenfell [Tower] and the tragic loss of 72 Londoners, and I remain deeply disappointed that we have not seen the wholesale systemic and cultural change that I and those affected expected. I will continue to put pressure on the Government and the industry, and I stand ready to work with them to ensure we end this crisis so Londoners can be safe in their homes.

Hina Bokhari: Thank you. The Building Safety Act does enshrine some protections for leaseholders, but is not enough. The Government is calling on developers to sign up to the building safety repairs pledge. MrMayor, will you ensure developers in London sign up to the Government’s pledge?

Sadiq Khan: I will do whatever we can to encourage that to happen. It gives me a chance to give credit to [The Rt Hon] MichaelGove [MP, Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities], who has moved a long way in relation to this area since taking over this brief. I think this would not have happened had he not been the Secretary of State in this department, compared to his predecessor, and I commend the work he has done here, including challenging them to sign up to the levy. I will do whatever I can to encourage more developers to sign up and any help you can give would be much appreciated as well.

Hina Bokhari: Thank you. The GLA has significant relationships with developers. MrMayor, you have the ability to impact developers’ profits, which they seem to care more about. Will you stop working with developers who refuse to sign up to the building safety repairs pledge?

Sadiq Khan: We have to abide by the law. As enticing as it may be to break the law, which leads to us being liable for damages, I cannot do that as the Mayor. This is taxpayers’ money that I would have to pay in damages to a private firm that sued us because we ultra vires took them off a list because of reasons that we do not have the power to do. Subject to the legal advice we have, we will do whatever we can to put pressure on developers. That is why we are working closely with the Government. MichaelGove got them in and 45 of the 53 signed up; we are encouraging the others to sign up as well and we will do whatever we can with the powers we have to apply additional pressure as well.

Hina Bokhari: Shockingly though, 83% of leaseholders in London will not be protected from all costs related to fire safety defects and now Londoners in buildings lower than 11metres will have no financial support. This is outrageous and the Liberal Democrats are fighting against this. MrMayor, will you go further, stand up for Londoners and refuse to work with developers who do not take responsibility for buildings that they constructed, regardless of height?

Sadiq Khan: We will always act within the law, but the three areas where we have lobbied the Government to go further are on expansion of the scope to cover supported accommodation of any height, the protection of leaseholders from the costs for historic building safety defects they played no part in causing ‑ that is the retrospective protection for those who have already been forced to pay out ‑ and the building control choice. We want the removal of choice in building control for buildings of all heights to ensure a consistent standard across the board and to prevent any conflict of interest and to prevent that two‑tier system. We are lobbying the Government to go further in relation to both pieces of legislation. We are waiting to see the secondary legislation that it says it is going to publish and we will continue to apply pressure where we can to developers, to landholders and others to make sure steps are taken. Just to remind colleagues, it is not simply the developers. We also have to make sure that the managers and others make progress in this area as well.

Hina Bokhari: Thank you, MrMayor. It is a shame that we cannot go a little bit further by not working with developers, but I appreciate your answers.

Performance of the Metropolitan Police Service

Caroline Pidgeon: Is the Metropolitan Police fit for purpose?

Sadiq Khan: I am committed to supporting our MPS while also challenging them to improve, holding them to account and ensuring that Londoners receive the police service they deserve. We should be in no doubt about the scale and complexity of the task the MPS faces. Keeping a major global city safe is not easy. From policing global events and cracking down on organised crime gangs to tackling crime in our local communities, MPS officers do an incredible job often in extremely difficult circumstances.
This job has been made harder by over a decade of Government austerity. I have always been clear that you cannot get people safe on the cheap. Consistent underfunding has put frontline policing at risk and the Government needs to, once and for all, provide the £159million funding shortfall the Home Office has itself agreed the MPS needs.
Despite these challenges, London is bucking the national trend by stabilising crime levels that continue to increase in England and Wales. Gun crime offences are now at their lowest in years, knife crime and burglary are both down, and the MPS continues to tackle violence against women and girls. In a recent week of action 69 arrests were made for stalking and harassment.
However, there is much more work to do. A recent series of deeply concerning incidents has seriously damaged public trust and confidence in our police. The murder of SarahEverard by a serving officer, criminal activities by officers at the scene of the murders of BibaaHenry and NicoleSmallman, and the findings of the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) into the appalling misconduct of some officers at
Charing Cross Police Station have all disturbed and distressed Londoners, me included. I have been clear that the new Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] must demonstrate that they understand the scale of the cultural problems within the MPS and the urgency with which they must be addressed. They must be determined to earn back the trust and confidence of Londoners, and I will continue to oversee and scrutinise the delivery of these changes through my Police and Crime Plan.
The MPS contains many brilliant officers and staff who share my aspirations and who I know are keen to play their part in ensuring the bond with the communities they serve is not only restored but made stronger than ever.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you. As you referenced, to tackle crime effectively the MPS must have the confidence and trust of the public. You claimed that you lost confidence in the last Commissioner because you were not satisfied with the plan she outlined to root out unacceptable behaviour and rebuild Londoners’ trust in the MPS. What was specifically missing in the Commissioner’s plans that you wanted to see?

Sadiq Khan: Twofold. One was a proper understanding of the cultural issues that were illustrated by the various examples. I have mentioned a couple of them; there are many more. The list is not exhaustive. You need to understand the scale of the problem before you have the prognosis for how you are going to address that, and part of that is the plan to win back trust and confidence. It is twofold: one is a plan to address the deep cultural issues, and the second is a plan to win back trust and confidence. In the representations made up until the day the Commissioner stepped aside, I do not think those plans addressed either of those two issues.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you, that is helpful to know. As you mentioned, in recent months we have seen several high‑profile cases that have contributed to a fall in public confidence, but data from your own office shows that public confidence has been steadily falling since June 2017, when it was 69%, to just 51% in December 2021. Do you accept that there has been a steady fall in police confidence since 2017‑‑

Sadiq Khan: Yes.

Caroline Pidgeon: ‑‑ and what specifically will you work on with the new Commissioner to reverse this fall in public confidence?

Sadiq Khan: The numbers you refer to are from the Public Attitude Survey (PAS) and we deliberately widened the scope of the PAS to bring on board more in quantitative terms ‑ more Londoners ‑ but also other issues as well. In some parts of London, the reduction has been greater than others. Being frank, those are the more diverse parts of London where there are more Black Londoners, and it is also a fall in relation to the views of women Londoners as well.
One of the jobs of the Commissioner, working with all of us, has to be to make that graph firstly plateau and then return upwards. There is a policing reason why it is important because we police by consent. How can somebody be encouraged to come forward when they have been a victim of crime? I have met victims of crime, including victims of serious offences, not giving statements to the police because of a lack of confidence. You have the issue of witnesses not coming forward because they lack confidence. There is a separate issue in relation to people not wanting to sit on juries or join the police service because of a lack of confidence. It affects all of us, not just diverse communities and women, if certain parts of London lack the trust and confidence in our police that is needed. Then you add to that community leaders and people who work with young people not coming forward as well. That is a big issue.

Caroline Pidgeon: OK. Thank you. You are accepting that this is a big issue for the new Commissioner. A specific issue I wanted to raise with you: the MPS has continued problems with solving crimes. Sanction detection rates were just 8.5% across all crimes between January and April of this year, and worse, of course, as you are well aware, in areas like rape where it is just 5%.
Proper storage of evidence is key, but the recent Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) report into the MPS stated that, “Arrangements for the storage of property and exhibits were especially dire”. Damning words. Were you aware that evidence storage had been red for some time on the MPS’s own risk register and what action are you personally going to take to ensure the MPS urgently improves evidence storage to ensure it meets national guidance and improves its detection rates?

Sadiq Khan: Neither the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime or myself were aware until we saw the HMICFRS report into counter‑corruption that arose from the independent panel inquiry into [the murder of] DanielMorgan. Some of the examples that the HMICFRS showed in their report‑‑ these are post‑Morgan, by the way, these are not going back to the 1980s or 1990s, these are post and that is why they were so serious. You have read, I am sure, the report from HMICFRS which in your words was damning. That is another issue that the police need to address, and it is a serious issue for the reasons you said not only in relation to evidence, getting better sanction detection rates and convictions, but also to address perceptions, if not the reality, of corruption.

Caroline Pidgeon: Yes.

Sadiq Khan: That is the point of the HMICFRS report. They were looking into counter‑corruption in the police service as a consequence of the issues raised in Morgan. It is not simply the issue of, evidentially, the impact it has, but also in relation to concerns around corruption.

Caroline Pidgeon: Lovely, thank you. I will pick this up outside of the meeting.

TfL and Financial Sustainability

Elly Baker: A Financial Sustainability Group will meet in May 2022 to support and assess TfL’s progress towards becoming financially sustainable by April 2023. What is your assessment of this target and whether it can be achieved alongside maintaining an excellent public transport network?

Sadiq Khan: Prior to the pandemic, TfL was on a path to break even on the cost of operations, maintenance, financing and core renewals, having taken almost £1 billion out of its net operating costs since I first became Mayor in 2016. It is only because of the COVID pandemic that TfL required any emergency Government funding. A condition of the emergency funding settlement has required TfL to be financially sustainable again by April 2023. The funding agreements have also recognised that TfL will always need Government support for major capital enhancements and major renewals such as replacement of life‑expired rolling stock and signalling. This type of Government support for investment is required by all major transport networks around the world.
The latest TfL budget published in March[2022] shows the need for around £1.2 billion of emergency support in this financial year, which is significantly less than previous years during the pandemic. It also shows a balanced budget for 2023/2024 onwards, without any Government emergency support. However, in the absence to date of Government support for capital investment, TfL has been forced to budget on a managed decline scenario. This would mean bus cuts of 18% and Tube cuts of 9%, which would be disastrous for London. This would also be disastrous for the whole country, because TfL contracts contribute around £7 billion to the UK economy and support tens of thousands of jobs around the country.
It is critical that the Government agrees to provide longer‑term capital funding for major enhancements and renewals. This is the only way TfL will be able to afford to invest in the future of London’s public transport networks, and avoid the service cuts that will be inevitable under managed decline. The negotiations with the Government are currently going very slowly, and we need to break out of the cycle of short‑term piecemeal deals and move towards a serious, sustainable approach that will ensure London’s transport network can go on meeting the needs of our city.

Elly Baker: Thanks for the update, Mr Mayor. I want to specifically ask further about the capital settlement because there is a specific timescale around agreeing a capital settlement in time for the start of the 2022/23 financial year that was set down by Government in negotiations, and obviously you have outlined it is absolutely crucial. TfL want to use the settlement, for example, to electrify the bus fleets. This is essential to our target to get to net zero. Can you update us in more detail about what is happening with that settlement?

Sadiq Khan: I do not want to give a running commentary about that, but they are going very slowly. The Government has provided TfL with a high‑level technical proposal for a potential capital support framework, but there is no indication yet as to any figures. Without the figures, TfL cannot make the planning scenarios that they need to make. There are only just under six weeks left to go before the current capital deal expires, and it really is no way to run a £10 billion business when you are waiting, you have
six weeks to go. Just imagine the contracts we cannot enter into, the deals we cannot make, the savings we cannot make because, at the moment, we do not know how much money we are going to get post‑five and a half weeks’ time.

Elly Baker: There are conversations going on but those are not to the detail that is moving?

Sadiq Khan: Yes.

Elly Baker: Yes, thank you. I want to return to the part of the question around how we maintain an excellent public transport network while moving to financial sustainability, and specifically around buses and the Bus Action Plan that was published by TfL recently. The Bus Action Plan says,
“We must not let the short‑term unprecedented uncertainty around demand and funding distract us from this essential, clear, positive vision for 2030. This vision is within our grasp.”
Is there a danger the Bus Action Plan will remain a vision and not a reality, given that requirement to be financially sustainable?

Sadiq Khan: Without a doubt. At the moment, unless there is a long‑term capital deal from the Government commensurate with TfL’s plans, we are talking about an almost 20% cut in our buses.
At the moment, what we planned was for a 4% reduction in buses because in central London there is some duplication, particularly with the new Elizabeth line opening up next week. Some of the buses we could take from central London to outer London where there is a bigger need for buses, not least because there are fewer Tube lines in outer London. We are also encouraging more people in outer London to use buses rather than driving their cars. Also, we have noticed that, in the recent past, there has been greater recovery in outer London in bus usage, but it is not outer London to inner London, it is people working from home using the buses to go shopping or whatever.
There is a demand in outer London for our buses, so the idea we go to a managed decline scenario where we are reducing by 18% or 19% bus usage across London would be catastrophic to, in particular, outer London. That is what I try to explain to the Government, that it is in nobody’s interest to be making those sorts of savings: 8% or 9% in Tubes, 18% or 19% in our buses. The Bus Action Plan, unless we are careful, will just be a vision, an action plan, rather than a reality.

Elly Baker: Thanks, Mr Mayor. I know that there are lots of people in outer London who are really looking forward to engaging on what we can do to improve the bus services, so hopefully we will get to do that. Those are all my questions.

The Building Safety Act

Anne Clarke: In your view, will the Building Safety Act (2022) keep Londoners safe?

Sadiq Khan: The Building Safety Act is part of the solution in relation to the challenges we face in this area, and I welcome several of the measures of the Act, particularly the heightened scrutiny of new high‑rise developments. However, I am very concerned about the limited scope of the Act and have advocated for its expansion at every stage of the Parliamentary process. First, buildings under 18metres, housing vulnerable individuals, will not receive the heightened scrutiny of the new regulatory system. Second, the Act fails to offer assurances on regulatory measures to improve safety. Third, we know there are significant pressures arising from competency and skills gaps in the construction sector and I am worried that these will impact the swift implementation of the Fire Safety and Building Safety Acts and any recommendations from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. Also, people in buildings under 11metres remain vulnerable to crippling remediation costs and some leaseholders with non‑cladding defects face bills of up to £15,000, regardless of building height.

Anne Clarke: Thank you, MrMayor. I really welcome your earlier comments on this subject in regards to good regulation. It is plain how important it is that we build fit‑for‑purpose regulation around our built environment and our environment in general. I am just wondering, how do you think the Act could have helped Londoners living in buildings under 18metres?

Sadiq Khan: At the moment, it does not really. It does between 11 and 18[metres]. I think the height requirement should go. Either your building is safe, or it is not. Why should there be this 18metres cut‑off point? What about those who have already paid in the past, over the last three or four years? Will they get compensated? Many have, in inverted commas, ‘begged, borrowed, or stolen’ to pay for the cost of remediation.
I want to spare the Deputy Chair’s blushes, but I will not forget going to the fire [Barking Riverside]. He played a key role in bringing to my attention some of the challenges on that day and he played a lead role in relation to getting people out of their homes. That stays with you. That was not 18metres; it was around five storeys. You could smell it. Grenfell Tower was traumatic for many of us who went there, put aside the distress calls to those who lost their lives. In that fire people did not lose their lives but for the grace of God, daytime and so forth. The one in Worcester Park was also five storeys, I think, and so what is the difference? The speed of the fire, the Deputy Chair was explaining the speed of the fire and literally people were banging on doors to get people out. What if it had been at nighttime or what if they had not been good citizens, going door to door, banging on doors? This 18‑metre stuff is arbitrary and the Government should look again at why 18metres.

Anne Clarke: Yes, thank you. I can think of one example of a development in my constituency where there are some buildings that are over 18metres and some are under, and the situation of the various leaseholders. All of the buildings have the same fire safety defects but depending on which building you were lucky or unlucky enough to buy in, your fate is very different in terms of your finances, the stress levels are very different, and it has been a long, hard battle for all concerned.
Just reflecting then, next month it will be five years since the Grenfell tragedy. The Building Safety Bill was introduced in July last year [2021], but it will be 12 to 18 months from now before the Act is fully implemented. Would you agree that the Government is taking too long to make Londoners safe and what should it be doing to speed up the implementation of the Act?

Sadiq Khan: You are spot on in relation to delay and this Act having any impact. Without the secondary legislation, which is crucial, we do not really know the impact of what it is going to be. That is why it is really important for the secondary legislation to be written, agreed and put into practice as soon as possible. Every week that goes by without the secondary legislation is a week where the Act cannot really have any influence.
Separately, there is the consultation the Home Secretary announced yesterday of ten weeks. We need to move as fast as we can. Of course, we need to get the legislation right, but five years is not acting in haste. Five years is a lot of time. I know, speaking to colleagues yesterday, many families are very unhappy with the personal evacuation plan recommended by the Grenfell Tower Public Inquiry not being followed up by the Government. As it is, many of the recommendations need to be followed up and actioned, the Act needs to be enforced by the secondary legislation, and it needs to be done as soon as possible.

Anne Clarke: Many thanks, MrMayor.

New hospitals for London

Onkar Sahota: Amidst reports of significant delays, how important is it that the Government properly funds and moves forward with the new hospitals planned for London?

Sadiq Khan: London has some of the world’s most advanced healthcare facilities and best staff, but it also has some of the worst hospital buildings in Britain, with some just trying to keep the rain out. I want everyone to have the best patient experience no matter where they live in London, with high‑quality health services in buildings that are appropriate for delivering 21st‑century healthcare.
I understand that good progress is being made locally on individual projects in London like Whipps Cross and Epsom and St Helier, which were identified as priorities in the London [Health and Care] Estates Strategy. It is now vitally important that the new hospitals that have received planning approval are built as soon as possible. Although I have no powers over healthcare in the capital, I have been doing everything I can to progress these schemes. My planning officers have engaged proactively with stakeholders to resolve strategic planning matters on the Whipps Cross and Moorfields planning applications. Similarly, on the Hillingdon scheme, my officers are engaging positively with the planning authority to resolve planning issues.
These programmes are led and managed by the Department of Health and Social Care. Delays do not come from the local hospital programmes themselves but from the time taken by the Government to progress the national programme business case. Given the advanced state of development of some London schemes, the teams involved are confident that once the national programme is ready, we should see a significant shift in pace. The Government has committed to funding 48 new hospitals around the country. This includes the five hospital schemes in London, Whipps Cross, Hillingdon, Epsom and St Helier in Sutton, St Mary’s and Charing Cross, plus the earlier Moorfields rebuild, all in desperate need of the promised cash.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you for that, MrMayor. You mentioned Hillingdon Hospital, which is in my constituency and in the constituency of the Prime Minister. Last year, 49% of people who attended the accident and emergency (A&E) department in Hillingdon waited more than four hours. We also know that London needs 1,600 more beds, as per the King’s Fund report, and of course the Government has put forward £3.7billion of funding for 48 new hospitals across the country by 2030 but this looks very insufficient. Also, do you think with the levelling up agenda of the Government that London might miss out on some of that funding?

Sadiq Khan: We have had 12 years of austerity, so the tap has been turned off for
12 years and that has led to some of the challenges you are talking about. Now it has been turned on a bit, in relation to making up for the shortfall over the last 12 years. I gave some examples of the bricks and mortar challenges, with some buildings having rain coming in, and there are other challenges in relation to staffing issues. One of the points made when I met the RCN earlier this week was the record numbers of vacancies. Staff are stretched and unable to keep up with the pressure, putting aside COVID, and the non‑COVID cases that you will know of in relation to elective surgery, A&E and so forth. There needs to be reconsideration of some of the schemes cancelled: the bursary schemes, the grants.
Also, morale is rock bottom. You know this from the GP side and the medical side, and it is quite clear from speaking to the RCN that morale is at an all‑time low amongst nursing staff as well. They were telling me stories about inability to keep the staff they already had. The average length of tenure for a nurse a few years ago was 30 years; now it is eight years, which means you have to recruit four times as many. There is a whole host of challenges in the health and social care sector in relation to not just an injection of resources but also other issues in relation to how you treat staff, how you recruit staff and so forth. It is really important that the Government gets an urgent grip with this in spring and summer, in advance of the pressures we know are coming around the corner again when it comes to autumn and winter.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you, MrMayor, for that very comprehensive answer. You are absolutely right that the morale is very low. We need to put on record that NHS staff are working very hard, and I am very grateful for you reminding the Government of the necessity of making investment in London hospitals. Are we not glad, for example, that I was able to save four A&E departments in west London, which is important to the London Assembly. Things could have been much worse if that had not happened. Thank you very much for the hard work you do. Thank you.

Tourism in London

Joanne McCartney: What more needs to be done to increase tourist visits to London?

Sadiq Khan: Getting international tourism back to its pre‑pandemic levels as soon as possible is crucial to our economic recovery. A much higher proportion of London visitor spend comes from international markets than domestic ones. Central London lost £7.4billion in consumer spending from international tourism in 2020, compared to £3.5billion less from domestic tourism and £1.9billion from commuters compared to 2019. That is why I launched a £10million international tourist campaign in New York following the success of last year’s Let’s Do London domestic tourism campaign, which cost £6million and created £81million in economic benefit for London. The campaign will inspire travellers to choose London for their next trip by showcasing our unparalleled range of attractions, exhibitions and events. Half of all visitors to the UK visit London and those who combine a trip to London with another UK location spend up to 64% longer in the UK. That is worth around £641million a year to the UK economy.
I am doing my bit, but London’s leading tourism voices and I have already repeatedly lobbied the Government for extra support for the tourism sector. We have asked for an increase in the 50% rate relief scheme for the retail, leisure and hospitality sectors. We have also asked for a 12.5% rate of VAT for hospitality and leisure to be permanent, in line with other European countries, to encourage people back to city centres. We have asked the Government to reverse its decision to end the tax‑free shopping scheme for tourists. Britain is the only European country not to offer tax‑free shopping to international visitors. Sadly, the Government is yet to listen, but I will keep banging the drum for London as the best city in the world for international tourists to visit.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you, MrMayor, and the pictures and commentary on your US trip were very welcome. [Her Majesty] The Queen’s Jubilee celebrations are almost upon us. Is that factored into your international tourism campaign? It is a real showcase to the world.

Sadiq Khan: Firstly, many of us had the privilege of spending time with Her Majesty this week. Did she not look great, healthy and well?

Joanne McCartney: Yes.

Sadiq Khan: It was a joy to see her. I think Her Majesty is a great asset for our country, but I think Her Majesty’s Platinum Jubilee is a huge opportunity for our city and our country. I can see a member of the press in the public gallery who was with us in the States and he will be bored of me saying this, but what I talked to our American friends about was that they can come to the UK, the only place in the world for the pomp and pageantry and celebrating Her Majesty’s 70th year on the throne. It is a big factor this year.
We have been blessed by two big things this year in relation to our recovery. One is, I think, the world’s finest railway line opening up next week, named after Her Majesty, and secondly is Her Majesty’s Platinum Jubilee. There are also other great things happening in our city: the [Rolling] Stones, Adele, Ed Sheeran and Elton John playing in London, great street parties, 50 years of Pride, the Women’s Euros coming to our country ‑ the final is going to be in London ‑ and other great sporting events, the [Notting Hill] Carnival is back and so forth. There is no doubt about it, it is a fantastic jewel to have in our crown, if you forgive the pun, having Her Majesty’s Platinum Jubilee taking place this year. A lot of those activities during those bank holiday weekends will be in London.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you. What are your current projections for tourism recovery in London? I am particularly concerned about the high level of inflation. For example, in the US it is a 40‑year high, similar to our country. People will have less money in their pockets. Are we really making a virtue of the fact that our museums are free, for example?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, the estimates the industry leaders have is ‑ park for a second our tourism campaign and our trip ‑ that international tourism will not return to pre‑pandemic 2019 levels until 2024, and the shorter‑haul markets until 2023. If you bear in mind an answer to a previous question in which I said we have lost about £10billion a year, we could be losing £30 to £40billion if it is the case that international tourism does not return until 2024. That is why this campaign is so important to get international tourists back to the UK.
Inflation is a factor across the globe, but across the globe there is more assistance being given from their national governments. Also, frankly speaking, the exchange rate benefits the return of American tourists to London and so that is an advantage in relation to bringing American tourists back to London as well as the offer. Also, in America many of the people I spoke to, particularly in New York, have benefited from working from home in relation to money they have saved. Savings are big, the exchange rate is good, and it is a fantastic offer in London. In fact, a holiday to London, if you are on the east coast, can be cheaper than a holiday in other parts of America or in South America.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you.

Tackling crime

Marina Ahmad: Home Office documents revealed that there is a high fear of crime nationally and low confidence that the Government will tackle it effectively. What are you doing in London to tackle crime and what should the Government do to support your actions?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Over a decade of austerity, cuts and complacencies from the Government have eroded policing, justice services and victim support organisations around the country. It is hardly surprising that the public lacks faith in the Government’s agenda for policing and safety.
My new Police and Crime Plan outlines what I am doing to tackle and prevent crime. I have invested a record £1billion in the MPS and put in an extra 1,300 police officers on London streets. I have provided £54million of dedicated funding through the London Crime Prevention Fund to tackle complex problems across borough boundaries and support local communities to reduce violence and offending. The good news is the latest Office for National Statistics (ONS) statistics show that in the year to December2021 overall crime was stable in London, even as it increased in England and Wales. Knife crime in London fell by 7.2%, gun crime by 17% and robbery fell by 18%; welcome reductions, outstripping national performance.
Marina Ahmad AM: Thank you, MrMayor. The PrimeMinister has made a number of public interventions in recent months where he has misquoted crime statistics in an effort to make it appear that crime is falling nationwide. Crime rose by 18% in 2021, driven by a 54% increase in fraud cases. Can he really be trusted to reduce crime when he refused to acknowledge the problem and address it head on?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): No, he is a liar as well.
Marina Ahmad AM: Thank you, MrMayor.

Kerslake Review

Sem Moema: How will the recommendations from the Kerslake Review be implemented to deliver the homes London needs?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am proud that we have delivered almost 13,000 new CityHall‑funded council homes that have been started since 2018 as part of the biggest council house‑building programme in our capital in a generation, and another record year of affordable home starts, but I know we must do even more. The KerslakeReview provides a framework for taking a significant step forward in maximising the delivery of new genuinely affordable homes on GLA group land. In my formal response, I have set out exactly how I intend to take each of the recommendations forward. My team are working at pace to set up the structures and staffing necessary to implement the recommendations effectively.
I have published a statement of shared policy that has been endorsed by senior leaders across the organisation and reaffirms the GLAgroup’s priorities for housing delivery on GLAgroup land. I have appointed LynGarner [Chief Executive, London Legacy Development Corporation] as a new senior professional lead for the GLA group housing delivery. My DeputyMayor for Housing and Residential Development, TomCopley, will establish a new Homes for Londoners Board Subcommittee to oversee the GLA group housing programme and scrutinise performance. I will look to establish a CityHall developer over two stages, first by expanding the GLA’s existing housing development activities and, second, by piloting the direct delivery of housing. This work is already underway and is supported by extra resource set out in my recent budget.
Sem Moema AM: Thank you, MayorKhan. It was really great yesterday to hear at the first Housing Committee session of this year an in‑depth conversation about the KerslakeReview. A lot of those recommendations are really welcome and I am sure that many people around here, but especially on this side, particularly welcome the commitment to 50% genuinely affordable on GLA land and bringing those disciplines together across the GLA family. I wanted to ask you: what is your view on the assessment that the GLA should not take on the landlord function of those homes that are built and instead transfer that over to either councils or registered providers, given that the GLA does not have that competence at the moment, and it is not really something that they do?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): There is always a temptation for one to extend one’s powers and to increase the remit and so forth. I think you have to respect the powers councils have in relation to this area. Most of them take this remit and function very seriously, as indeed do housing associations. We should try to maximise what we are allowed to do by legislation, what we can do, and help councils and housing associations do that really important function of being a landlord. Anybody who has spoken to a council or housing association about that, and I know many of you have, realises that it is labour‑intensive and requires a huge amount of expertise. We do not have the resources, the budget or the staff to do that. I am very happy to allow councils and housing associations to do that and for us to maximise our strategic function ‑ whether it is land assembly, helping with permissions or helping with speeding up any of that sort of stuff ‑ to help councils do that job properly. That also means, by the way, challenging them when we need to do so and also working closely with them in joint ventures when we need to do so as well.
Sem Moema AM: Thank you. One of the other things that we heard yesterday was about the different ways in which the functional bodies of the GLA ‑ for example, the police and the London Fire Commissioner (LFC) ‑ dispose of property in slightly different ways to, for example, CityHall itself. I really welcome the idea ‑ to pre‑empt AssemblyMemberHall’s possible question about the strategy from MOPAC around its disposals ‑ of how you are going to bring all of that together so that we can have, like you say, a more strategic approach to improving the pace and the volume of homes that are built, and have a shared understanding of what the priorities are, whether it is around best value or increasing new homes across the portfolio.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): This is one the small‑t tensions that have to be overcome. The legislation that covers surplus land in TfL, MOPAC, the MPS and the LFC is different, and we have to make sure everyone is on the same page in relation to what the needs of our city are. That is one of the jobs that LynGarner will have in relation to the ‘joined‑up‑ness’. Everyone, I think, agrees. If you speak to those in the MPS, too many of their staff do not live in London because they cannot afford to live in London. They would love for their staff to live in London. The same goes for the fire service. Everyone agrees that there is a need for genuinely affordable homes in our city. On this issue of best value, we need to make sure that nobody is inadvertently not providing best value.
One of the jobs that LynGarner will have, working with colleagues in CityHall, TomCopley [Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development], the ChiefInvestmentOfficer and others, is to make sure everyone is on the same page in this area. Everyone has signed up to the objective. The Kerslake Review was really useful in reminding us that everyone should be focused on that. Let us be frank, the expertise of MOPAC, MPS, LFC and TfL is not in housing delivery, right? We should let them do the brilliant stuff they are good at doing and let somebody else be in charge of this area. This is one of the things we hope LynGarner will bring to the table.
Sem Moema AM: Thank you very much.

Scrapping of free COVID-19 testing

Krupesh Hirani: As COVID-19 cases remain high, will you call on the Government to reconsider their decision to scrap free lateral flow and PCR testing?

Sadiq Khan: Can I take the opportunity just to say a couple of things before Assembly Member Hirani asks his supplementary questions. I met this week colleagues from the Royal College of Nursing (RCN), who have done a brilliant job in relation to vaccinations, which have been really important in relation to dealing with this really important virus. They reminded me that testing is an important part of any effective disease prevention and control strategy, and that is one of the reasons why Assembly Member Russell was so concerned about the issues in relation to Government changes. I do welcome the fact that people with underlying health conditions, NHS patient‑facing staff and staff in adult social care can get free tests. My view is that the Government must continue to ensure sufficient testing is available to protect people in vulnerable service and settings, and to maintain a decent surveillance system.

Krupesh Hirani: Recently we reached a tragic milestone of 20,000 Londoners losing their lives to COVID‑19 over the pandemic period. These are not just figures but they are real lives lost and real families affected all across London, and even more across the whole country. In the seven days to
11May 2022 there were 81 deaths recorded in London within 28 days of a positive test. This level of COVID‑19 mortality has remained the same since about February 2022. On free testing, the Labour administration in Wales has taken a more pragmatic approach and extended free tests to the end of June2022. We are hearing a lot about living with COVID‑19 but how can we live with COVID‑19 if we do not know who has it?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for raising that. The concern is that only the well‑off can afford to live with COVID‑19. Those that are not well off cannot. Actually, within different boroughs of London there are different rates. The concern is those boroughs where there tends to be greater deprivation and where people are less likely to be able to, with the limited monies they have ‑ made worse by the cost of living crisis ‑ pay for a test and then find out they have symptoms, rather than the alternative. I will give you an example. In the London Borough of Enfield, the rates are 58.5 per 100,000, whereas in Hillingdon they are 115.9 per 100,000. That is almost double from one borough to another. That is why it is a concern.
The reason why the Welsh Government extended until June the free tests was because they wanted to make sure the numbers were properly down before the testing regime came down. It is a concern. If you are well off, you can go to a local pharmacist and buy these tests. If you are not, you are taking a risk. If you have flu‑like symptoms it could be flu or it could be COVID‑19, and the point is that you could be passing this on to somebody whose immunity is suppressed and that could have tragic consequences. That is why we did lobby the Government for the free testing to continue, unsuccessfully.

Krupesh Hirani: Thank you, Mayor. Moving from testing to vaccinations, less than half of eligible Londoners have received their booster jabs. How are you continuing to work with London’s NHS and central government to ensure that communities are not left behind in the vaccination programme?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for your question. I raised this in my most recent meeting with NHS leaders and, in fact, my Health Advisor raised this to me yesterday. That huge amount of work that we did over the last couple of years, as you will know from your experience in Brent ‑ particularly going out to those communities that were hesitant to ask them to do their first vaccine, then the second one, but then there was the evergreen offer which is that nobody is left behind ‑ has been successful. Each week, there are many people who receive their first dose. As I said in my original answer, we are keen to make sure that those who are eligible to get their fourth injection, ostensibly ‑ the two vaccinations, the booster and now the other one ‑ are receiving them. GPs are following these up, as indeed are NHS Direct. Anecdotally, people I know above the age of 75 have received their invitations.
It is really important that we raise awareness of this, the spring booster, but also, we go back to those who may have missed out altogether to remind them it is never too late to receive your first vaccination. Any help Members of the Assembly can give, bearing in mind your links in the community, is much appreciated by not just the NHS but, I am sure, by all of us.

Krupesh Hirani: Thank you, Mr Mayor, and I thank you for visiting the Brent Central Mosque in Willesden Green, where they had a real vaccination drive and made sure that people attending Friday prayers could also get vaccinated. Thank you, no further questions.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you, Assembly Member Hirani. Just as a matter of explanation, the reason I allowed that to come up was because it was directly related, on the subject, and I thought it would be sensible to the people watching that we looked at the topic in one go. We will come back to the Order Paper and the next question is in the name of Assembly Member Ahmad.